Saved, add away. I can handle more than one conversation at a time if need be.
And as to your comment, quite the contrary. I have read the Bible THOROUGHLY. I have spent well over 25 years reading the Bible. And very early on in this process, I chose to consciously reject all commentary on Scripture reading nothing but Scripture itself. I read Scripture without any study notes, commentary, without even any cross references. I wanted nothing of men to cloud my reading. I wanted ONLY what Scripture had to say. And I read it that way for many years until I had a good handle on it. Then I started comparing commentaries and study notes.
The problem is, it seems to me, you read part of it and ignore the rest. Or you read part of it and decide that one part is more important than another part. You have decided that the parts that say salvation is a gift are more important than the parts that say salvation is something we must struggle for. That, and what you have been taught, have clouded your mind so you can’t see that all of Scripture teaches the truth equally. You can’t subordinate one part of Scripture to another. One must read all of Scripture together, and then by taking all the pieces and putting them together can one see the entire picture. This has caused you to be unable to see that while works are required, they do not save us. This seems like a paradox to you when it shouldn't be. It is nothing but what Scripture say throughout.
I do not mean to offend, and I hope I don't. If I do, I beg your forgiveness. But it seems to me that you have had your reading of Scripture tainted by the Protestant theology you have been taught. If you ignore all teaching of men, come to Scripture with a pure heart and a blank mind, and with much prayer for the Holy Spirit to guide into all truth, as Christ promised He will, then Scripture opens up like a flower. That you are tainted by what you have been taught is reflected in your comments on the rich man. You have added to Scripture what isn't there. Here, let me explain.
Nothing in the story of the rich man indicates that he was seeking to be justified by his deeds. He asked no question that everyone who has ever wanted to convert hasn’t asked. He came to Jesus and said, “What must I do to inherit eternal life?”
There is no ulterior motive here. Nothing to indicate that he is seeking to justify himself before God. He asks a very straightforward question. Nothing in the passage indicates anything else. However, Jesus immediate response does indicate one critical factor which is ultimately the indicator as to why the man turned away saddened. He had no faith. The man came to Jesus and said, “Good teacher…” And Jesus responded, “Why do you call me good? None is good but God.”
Now how are we to understand this? We can’t ignore it, but we have multitudes of other passages that show us that Jesus not only is good, but is God. In fact, this passage indicates that if Jesus IS good, then He IS God. Let’s look at the passage carefully. Notice Jesus doesn’t DENY that He is good, but He merely asks the man why he called Him good. This, especially when read with the rest of Scripture, shows that Jesus is not denying His divinity, but rather remarking on the man’s lack of faith. The man does not believe in Christ. Jesus knows the hearts of men, as we are told in numerous other passages, and He also knows this man’s heart, and He sees that the man called Him “good” teacher not in faith, but in an attempt to “butter Him up”, as we say. So Jesus gives the man a rather summary answer to the question, wishing to test the man. Jesus says, “You know the commandments. Keep them.”Then the man asks, “Which ones?” And Jesus lists them (at least the 6 that deal with the relationship between men ; significantly, Jesus left out the ones that deal with man’s relationship with God). But then we see something rather remarkable from the man. If, as you claim, he was attempting to justify himself according to his deeds before God, Jesus had given him a way out. The man could have said to himself, “Whew. I’m ok then. I have been doing that, and Jesus just told me that’s all I need to do. I’m in the clear. HA HA I’m going to heaven!” But no. The man was at least honest with himself. He knew that wasn’t enough. He had done that since his youth, and he knew from personal experience that something was still lacking. And so the man replies to Jesus, seeking more, “But I have kept these since my youth.” And here is where Jesus gives him the real answer to his question. The prior stuff was fluff simply to test the man. Jesus looked at the man and loved him (this is given to us in Mark’s account). And that He loved the man shows that what He says next is the true answer. He tells the man, “To be perfect, go sell all you have and come follow me.” THAT is what we ALL must do to be saved. THAT is the REAL answer to the man’s question. We must give up everything. Forsake all, and follow Jesus. If we aren’t willing to do that, we will never enter the Kingdom of God. THAT is the narrow way. And the man turned away saddened. Have I misinterpreted the text? I believe not, because Jesus’ next statement shows that the man has just rejected salvation. Jesus turned to His disciples and said, “How hard it is for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of heaven.”
The reason I made no distinction in my initial citation of this passage between Jesus telling the man to obey the commandments and telling him to forsake all and follow Him is because they are basically the same thing (after all, Jesus didn't LIE to the man the first time, did He?). The only difference is that the former (i.e. the list of commandments) lists the external manifestations of the latter’s (i.e. forsaking all and following Christ) inner reality. In Aristotelian metaphysical terms, the “forsaking all and following Christ” would be the essence of what one must do to be saved, while the list of commandments would be the accidents. Do you know Aristotelian metaphysics? Or at least the distinction he makes between essence and accident? I hope so, or else my explanation just went sailing past you.
But the essence of the story still shows that what we DO plays a critical role in our salvation. For a much more in depth discussion of these, you can go to the Open Theism thread and read my post there. I went into much depth of what we must do to be “saved”.
Poll
